Current, former officials back secret surveillance

If the President had been governing instead of being out each day to figure out
how socialism was going to go forward, he would have figured out that people
like freedoms instead of being subservient to others, especially, the
government.

What a time for us to fall under socialism without a war
with Russia. Russia doesn't even have to worry now that we won't like
socialism, as our President has set that tone. He got elected but he
doesn't have all the people on his side. That is a shame that he
doesn't try to govern for the people but only his Chicago bunch of hoodlums
ready to beat us up with IRS, freedom of press vindictive behavior, and the NSA
scandals that the President probably likes as it is a crisis.

And some are willing to let
these people have secret surveillance over our families? I don't get it.

My2CentsTaylorsville, UT

June 17, 2013 4:40 a.m.

LOL, like all criminals they think that when they break the law it is their
right and have no regrets or ethical standards. Breaking the law is illegl and
this secret spying is unconditional no matter how you read the document.
Security is the duty of the citizens and why we are armed and have the right to
bear arms to secure and keep the government from this kind of intrusiveness and
oppressive information. Spying is an affront to freedom and our laws. All
citizens are the US militia, not just those in uniforms so using security as a
shield and lie to wrongfully amass personal and private information as national
security is not justified.

This dysfunctional government has gone
over the edge and its time all spying and all spy agency's be dissolved
since we no longer have any enemy's outside this country, so our dictator
claims.

TatorsHyrum, UT

June 17, 2013 1:13 a.m.

Day-to-day conversations and communications of average citizens have not and are
not targeted. No one has yet given me an example of how they personally have
experienced any direct negative consequences in their life because of this
terrorist surveillance program. It's rather sad to see the paranoia
generated from what some people imagine up in their minds... things that are
hardly even remote possibilities, yet all the while receiving additional
national security that they don't seem to comprehend nor appreciate.

How and why is this specifically against the Constitution?

What has actually happened is that multiple terrorist threats have been
detected and taken out before they could be enacted. For this we should be
grateful and supportive of this program.

HemlockSalt Lake City, UT

June 16, 2013 2:24 p.m.

The first issue is secret surveillance and its legality. The second is the
security of that data. As the NSA and IRS have shown, no data held by the
government is safe. How long before someone again leaks information for
political purposes? When Nixon secretly recorded conversations he was
castigated. Recently someone secretly recorded Sen. Lindsay Graham's benign
conversation and was rewarded.